Ron Paul on Leno: No Endorsements

From a Facebook Post on LP Radicals by a (proclaimed) member of the audience for the taping earlier today:

Just came back from (the taping of) Ron Paul on Jay Leno.  Ron Paul did not endorse anyone and said a third party run was unlikely. So the news? *SPOILER ALERT* He was kind of subtle about it, but he said he needed a rest for 2016.  He did not say it was for Rand either.  (I guess he’s not done yet. Yay!)  That was the announcement, if any.  It was amazing to see him. He was about 6 feet away from me at the very end before exiting stage left.

The program is due to be broadcast about 1 hour from now beginning in the eastern time zone.

 

42 thoughts on “Ron Paul on Leno: No Endorsements

  1. Jill Pyeatt

    I’m amazed that so many people thought that Johnson or Gray would move aside and let Dr. Paul take their place–when he won’t even endorse them. I’m glad the weekend of crazy speculation is over.

  2. From Der Sidelines

    @3: Yes, Benton sucks, and he has undermined the Paul campaign both in 2008 and 2012.

  3. Trent Hill

    Paul spoke of the problems of running third party–because there is a bias against them. But he did speak in generous terms about third parties and the obstacles they face.

  4. Jake

    Most campaign managers with the winning percentage of Jesse Benton would be hard pressed to find a multi-million dollar campaign to run and operate in 2016, but we all know the Paul’s like to keep it in the family and will most likely use his services once again…which is a shame.

  5. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    @3 He sucks.

    Why? Because Paul didn’t endorse Johnson, or Goode, or Stein, or Romney, or Obama?

    Paul owes nothing to any of them. None of them are 100% on Paul’s page. Paul has his views, they have theirs. Paul fought his fight, the rest must fight theirs.

    Yes, I know Johnson endorsed Paul. So what? Paul never asked for Johnson’s (useless) endorsement, and never promised anything in return.

  6. Arthur DiBianca

    In 2008, Ron Paul endorsed a bunch of horrible big-government Republicans in races that also had Libertarian candidates.

    I just hope he doesn’t do that again.

  7. ATBAFT

    I did, as I advised all you others to do months ago: not send one penny to the Ron Paul campaign and save it up to donate to Gary Johnson instead.

  8. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    @ 10, I wonder if that’s true?

    Did anyone outside of New Mexico even know who Johnson was in 2008?

  9. Thomas L. Knapp

    ATBAFT,

    “I did, as I advised all you others to do months ago: not send one penny to the Ron Paul campaign and save it up to donate to Gary Johnson instead.”

    Or better yet, buy a nice bottle of bourbon with it.

  10. Gene Berkman

    Gary Johnson spoke at Ron Paul’s Rally for the Republic in 2008.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZLauZ3XEMg

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-E3Hh7uKYU

    Gary Johnson was the highest ranking former elected official to support Ron Paul’s campaign in 2008, until after Ron Paul had ended his campaign, when Jesse Ventura also came out for Paul.

    I worked on Ron Paul’s Libertarian Party campaign in 1988 and his Republican campaign in 2008. He does seem ungrateful to the many Libertarians who provided the initial support for the 2008 campaign, let alone most of the work for his 1988 campaign.

  11. NewFederalist

    “He does seem ungrateful to the many Libertarians who provided the initial support for the 2008 campaign, let alone most of the work for his 1988 campaign.”

    I agree with you, Gene. I guess even our heroes get old and crotchety and perhaps a little bitter. As great a man as he was (or is) he still spent a ton of money and accomplished very little.

  12. Gene Berkman

    rrr@ 18 you are correct that Jesse Ventura spoke at the Rally for the Republic, and he even plugged Dean Barkley – the Independence Party candidate for U.S. Senate.

    This year Jesse Ventura is backing Gov. Gary Johnson for President.

  13. Deran

    I really agree with New Fed on this point; massive amounts of time, energy and money spent and not much heat generated.

    I sometimes wonder if Paul doesn’t play sort of a “Kucinich” role in the GOP – keeping libertarians in the GOP, like Kucinich tried to keep Leftists in the Demo Party? Although, Kucinich never generated the money or energy that Paul does, and Kucinich was unrestrained in his support of Kerry and Obama.

  14. roseanne-rothbard report

    @21 — There was never going to be any big announcement. That was strictly something dreamed up in the heads of supporters posting on dailypaul.com and the like.

  15. Austin Battenberg

    @15 Can you elaborate on how he is ungrateful towards Libertarians who initially supported his campaign? Just because he doesn’t endorse Johnson doesn’t mean he is ungrateful.

  16. JT

    Gene: “He does seem ungrateful to the many Libertarians who provided the initial support for the 2008 campaign, let alone most of the work for his 1988 campaign.”

    New Fed: “I agree with you, Gene. I guess even our heroes get old and crotchety and perhaps a little bitter. As great a man as he was (or is) he still spent a ton of money and accomplished very little.”

    How does he seem “ungrateful”? Because he says that he won’t run as a third party candidate & that he wouldn’t get as much money or media if he did? I haven’t sensed any bitterness either. There must be something I’m missing here. Please fill me in.

  17. Gene Berkman

    JT @ 25 – When Ron Paul announced in 2007 that he would be a candidate, Libertarian Party members responded with campaign contributions before anyone else, and certainly in greater amounts than were provided by Constitution Party members.

    In 2008, Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin of The Constitution Party, who had campaigned for Congressman Paul in the primary, unlike Bob Barr.

    This year, one candidate is running for President who had backed Ron Paul’s campaigns – Gary Johnson. Ron Paul himself has mentioned as late as 2008 his life membership in The Libertarian Party.

    In 2012, The Republican Party went out of its way to make it harder for Ron Paul to conduct his campaign, and the GOP has shown its contempt for pro-freedom forces inside and outside their party.

    Paul has had a chance to show his commitment to the libertarian movement that made his political career possible, and he has decided to be neutral. I guess that is his choice.

  18. Austin Battenberg

    There is an interview with Doug Wead where he talks about why Ron Paul didn’t go after Romney as much as he did Santorum or Gingrich (remember the media kept saying there was an alliance?), and he elaborated that Romney threatened them with a “PR A-bomb” and that a decision was made to avoid such a confrontation because Romney has the money and resources to really hurt Paul politically. Wead said he didn’t agree with it, and thought they should, but others (probably Jesse Benton), wanted to go the safe route.

    My guess is that Ron Paul doesn’t want to endorse Johnson for several reasons:

    1. Unlike 2008, his son is in the Senate and has Presidential aspirations, and Ron does not want to harm any future possibility for Rand.

    2. Gary Johnson is pro-choice. While many of us might not put it high on our importance list, we all should respect and understand that Ron Paul is devoutly pro-life, and it would be hard for him to endorse someone who is pro-choice, even if they agree on a great deal of other issues.

    3. Many of Ron Paul’s supporters haven’t warmed up to Gary Johnson for a number of reasons, whether its his support for humanitarian wars, the Fair Tax, keeping Gitmo open, and/or not having a philosophical basing for his libertarianism. For that reason, Ron Paul probably doesn’t want to alienate his supporters, and instead of “endorsing” anyone, he remains neutral but when pressed says good things about Johnson.

    We don’t have to like it, or agree with it, but I don’t think it has anything to do with bitterness towards Libertarians. And we all know why Ron Paul endorsed Baldwin over Barr, so lets not assume that Paul would automatically vote for Goode over Johnson. My money is that Paul will vote for Johnson, even if he doesn’t say it.

  19. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    @ 26: Paul has had a chance to show his commitment to the libertarian movement that made his political career possible, and he has decided to be neutral.

    You’re confusing the Libertarian Party with the libertarian movement.

    Some people show their commitment to the libertarian movement by denouncing the LP, others by supporting the LP, still others by remaining neutral on the LP.

    I know some LP members have deluded themselves into thinking they are THE “political arm” of the freedom movement — that they even own a Trademark on the term “Libertarian Party.”

    Not so.

    The LP is just another hack political party, one of many, that claims to support freedom. The Republicans, Democrats, Constitutionists, and Greens all love the word “freedom.”

  20. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    If Gary Johnson endorsed Ron Paul in 2008, it was presumably because Johnson thought that Paul was the best candidate for the job, and not because he wanted payback.

    If Paul did not endorse Johnson in 2012, it was presumably because Paul did not think Johnson was that great a candidate.

    I know that hacks like Root like to trade favors and endorsements. I know that’s normal in politics.

    Kudos to Ron Paul for rising above hack politics, and refusing to play tit-for-tat political trading.

  21. Steve M

    @29……. it takes more then one person to make a president. you have to build a team….. so who has Ron endorsed this year for any other office?

    As far as I can tell… no one… this has all been about one man for one office….

    In my opinion….. the efforts of the Johnson team in searching for other candidates to add to the team…. that is what is needed towards building a coalition…

    I think in a number of ways Gary Johnson is a much more mature candidate then Ron Paul.

  22. Steve M

    Ok I found a few:

    Ted Cruz for senate from Texas
    Minnesota State Rep. Kurt Bills running for US Senate

  23. Gene Berkman

    Steve M -actually in 2008, 2010 and this year Ron Paul has endorsed numerous candidates.

    Paul has backed some libertarian Republican candidates – John Dennis in San Francisco being the most hard core. Paul backed the more conservative libertarian Justin Amash in Michigan, who was elected in 2010.

    And Ron Paul has endorsed numerous incumbent Republican Congressmen, some of whom are limited government conservatives, and some not so good.

    In 2008, Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin for President on the Constitution Party ticket.

  24. Andy

    “2. Gary Johnson is pro-choice. While many of us might not put it high on our importance list, we all should respect and understand that Ron Paul is devoutly pro-life, and it would be hard for him to endorse someone who is pro-choice, even if they agree on a great deal of other issues.”

    I’m pretty sure that Gary Johnson and Ron Paul both have the same stance on abortion, as in that it should be decided by the states.

    Also, note that Gary Johnson said that he opposes late term abortions.

  25. Steve M

    Andy,

    Gary’s published position is..

    “Life is precious and must be protected. A woman should be allowed to make her own decisions during pregnancy until the point of viability of a fetus.”

    I don’t see leaving it up to the state in his statement.

  26. Dan Reale

    Ron Paul in 1988 was the right candidate with the right party at the wrong time. There was no way anyone was going to make traction in 1988. That’s just the problem with being somewhere decades ahead of schedule. It just doesn’t look the right place. You just walk away with this impression that it’s the wrong place and that’s how it will always be. The world just wasn’t ready – and both major parties were the casino when Americans were looking for a solid retirement program.

    In 2008, Ron Paul was the right candidate with the wrong party at the right time. Both major parties were still casinos. Paul’s involvement just helped them maintain just enough of a veneer of legitimate debate that the luster held to the election. Going to the LP (or just plain any other party but the major two problems we have) would have made no material difference in the money raised and all the material difference in not having to appeal to the statist crazies for most of the campaign. 34-38% was doable and would have in fact put him in the White House. But you don’t get to do that by being the GOP’s Charlie Brown trying to kick the football until it’s too late to switch. The fact is that Republicans will opt to THROW the election rather than have anyone remotely like Dr. Paul win it.

    Today, Ron Paul was just the wrong candidate who never seemed to learn that 1) Not every year is 1988 and 2) that there is no net gain whatsoever in lending any sort of credibility to the GOP casino. And this time, they didn’t even have the decency to feed Paul and his supporters free drinks as they squandered a fortune on that slot machine.

    2016 would only be a perpetuation of Paul, Inc. for its own sake, which I distinguish very clearly from the man, Ron Paul, himself (who did heroic amounts of work and made leaps of progress when it comes to spreading the message). Rand Paul’s endorsement of Romney is just the beginning of Paul, Inc. Bad things will come of this, and once again, all things Paul will fail to convince Republican water to not be so wet.

    I’ll agree that the LP does not own the “liberty brand”. But neither does Paul, Inc.

  27. Stewart Flood

    After the turnout we got last night in South Carolina for Governor Johnson, it is clear that the tide is beginning to turn and people are starting to listen.

    We had a week to put it together and we filled the venue.

  28. Austin Battenberg

    Any pictures or videos? I would love to see a crowd in front of Johnson larger than a hundred. A crowd that is there to see HIM.

  29. paulie

    Why? Because Paul didn’t endorse Johnson, or Goode, or Stein, or Romney, or Obama?

    Paul owes nothing to any of them. None of them are 100% on Paul’s page.

    Check ontheissues.org to see how close each of these candidates is to Ron Paul.

  30. zapper

    @35 Well put. Ron Paul has been, and remains, a principled libertarian who has won over the hearts and minds of millions of interested Americans who seek a path to liberty.

    Unfortunately, Ron Paul does not have talent as a political strategist, nor do any of his advisors, campaign managers or “strategists” on his team. Hence the repeated failures you have mentioned.

  31. JT

    Gene: “Paul has had a chance to show his commitment to the libertarian movement that made his political career possible, and he has decided to be neutral. I guess that is his choice.”

    It’s true that RP has decided to be neutral, but I don’t think that proves that he’s ungrateful to Libertarians. He doesn’t owe it to the LP to endorse its candidates for President just because he was the Libertarian candidate for President in 1988 or because many Libertarians have supported his Republican campaigns.

    As far as Libertarians making his political career possible, I think that’s an overstatement. I don’t think it’s because of Libertarians that he’s been a U.S. Representative for a long time. He was a Republican in the House before 1998 & he was known to voters in his district when he ran again as a Republican later.

    “Ungrateful” to me would mean that he has publicly criticized the Libertarian candidate or the LP. I don’t recall him ever doing that, even though he has said when he has been asked that he can’t raise as much money or get as much media as he can as a Republican, which is true. He also refuses to endorse the Republican candidate for President.

  32. Gene Berkman

    JT @ 40 – when Ron Paul decided to return to Congress in 1996, he did not have support from either the local Republican Party or the national leadership. The national leaders – Gingrich, Dick Armey, Phil Gramm – actually recruited the incumbent Democrat to the Republican Party, and they backed the incumbent in the primary against Paul.

    Ron Paul’s return to Congress was made possible by his national fundraising list of libertarians, gold bugs and Birchers. So in fact Libertarians helped his political career every step of the way, even as Republicans since 1996 have tried to stop him.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *